I've been going over last weeks game in my head this evening, and just had an off-hand thought about how that PI call would have turned out had Haley been able to challenge the penalty call. And tried to put myself on both sides of the argument for and against it. As well as just realizing the NFL would never just expose the referee's to such questioning.

When thinking it would be a good idea, I was going over how many league letters must go out weekly and how it would ultimately ensure the calls are correct on the field. The coaches are already able to kind of challenge a referee's decision by challenging ball spots and so forth. Getting everything right would be the pro's in this scenario, while a potentially longer game and bitter zebra's the con's...

When thinking against it, I came up with the argument that it wouldn't really change much anyway. While there are horribly blown calls week in and week out, generally they do not effect the outcome of a game anyway. The winners still find ways to overcome and win, and the losers do not. Most flags are judgment calls anyway, and the referee would tend to follow the judgment of his co-workers and not overturn many unless it was completely, 100%, entirely, extra-ordinarily terrible.

I dunno... I just know the NFL are prickly bitches when it comes to players and coaches criticizing their officials, yet there seems to be no real penalty for bad officiating except their score may go down, and they don't "make the playoffs"... I find that to be a little too lenient.

What say you planet? Good Idea? Bad Idea? Good Idea that will never happen anyway so why even discuss it?

I'm kinda torn on the issue.While I'd like the refs to get every call right the first time,it's simply impossible at game speed with everything that they have to keep up with.I mean if that's the end game then just take them off the field,put them up in the booth with all of the cameras and replays at their disposal and maybe then they have a better shot of being perfect.

Penalties are whats part of the game. Thats what makes it interesting. This would be the same thing as taking an umpire from behind the plate and just just having a computer make all the strikes and balls calls. A little error from the umps/refs is part of the game. Like in baseball you have to make adjustments to the strike zone. In football if they aren't calling holding on tamba hali hell just keep holding him. Making adjustments to the games is the difference between wins and loses. good teams and bad teams.

I'm kinda torn on the issue.While I'd like the refs to get every call right the first time,it's simply impossible at game speed with everything that they have to keep up with.I mean if that's the end game then just take them off the field,put them up in the booth with all of the cameras and replays at their disposal and maybe then they have a better shot of being perfect.

Exactly where I am. I'm in the middle of an argument I started with myself. (That sounds crazy, and probably is.) I don't know what side of the fence to be on. I figure, throw it up on here and hope someone convinces me one way or the other.

Penalties are whats part of the game. Thats what makes it interesting. This would be the same thing as taking an umpire from behind the plate and just just having a computer make all the strikes and balls calls. A little error from the umps/refs is part of the game. Like in baseball you have to make adjustments to the strike zone. In football if they aren't calling holding on tamba hali hell just keep holding him. Making adjustments to the games is the difference between wins and loses. good teams and bad teams.

That's a good take, human error is indeed part of the game and important to it's success. I'm not suggesting non-calls be reviewable. (but it would probably eventually end up that way if calls were.) But blatant errors should be able to be corrected. I dunno...

That's a good take, human error is indeed part of the game and important to it's success. I'm not suggesting non-calls be reviewable. (but it would probably eventually end up that way if calls were.) But blatant errors should be able to be corrected. I dunno...

funny you make this thread. I just had the same conversation with someone the other day.

Everything should be reviewable. It already is, off the record: thanks to technology, we have the ability to replay what just happened. And then everyone at home, and in the stadium watching the Jumbotrons, sees exactly what happened, and even the refs themselves might look up and think privately, "Oops, ****ed up that one." Why, in this day and age, we still have AARP-eligible fat guys with bad eyes deciding these games is beyond me. Already this year we've seen a couple of teams get screwed by calls or non-calls or wrong calls (Chiefs included). Oh, it's nice when the NFL sends a team an apology letter a few days later saying, "Oops, we ****ed up the call." Too bad they don't send a W in your stat column at the same time. They already have the challenge rule, and the replay booth on the field, and the refs can already stop play and review something in the last two minutes of the game. Just go whole-hog already, and have a senior official in the booth (with the power to override the on-field call) with access to the same replays we see at home. Get rid of that stupid on-field booth; it doesn't work. It's supposed to take a minute or less but always takes five, by the time the old bastard walks over to the booth, shoots the shit with the guy upstairs, watches it a few times... If they move the "final word" upstairs it'll happen a lot quicker and smoother.

And this isn't just for football. I think all sports should have more thorough refereeing by video evidence. There are slight inroads being made (whether a baseball is fair or foul, whether a hockey puck crosses the goal line, whether a basketball shot leaves the player's hands before the clock hits double zeroes) but it's not enough. How is an on-field ump supposed to catch the split-second difference between a runner's toe hitting the bag and the baseman catching the ball? Why do we have to watch an ump punch out a batter on a third strike when everyone at home can see on the replay that it was about six inches outside the strike zone? Sports are now multimillion-dollar businesses and, as such, should be reffed accordingly.

Everything should be reviewable. It already is, off the record: thanks to technology, we have the ability to replay what just happened. And then everyone at home, and in the stadium watching the Jumbotrons, sees exactly what happened, and even the refs themselves might look up and think privately, "Oops, ****ed up that one." Why, in this day and age, we still have AARP-eligible fat guys with bad eyes deciding these games is beyond me. Already this year we've seen a couple of teams get screwed by calls or non-calls or wrong calls (Chiefs included). Oh, it's nice when the NFL sends a team an apology letter a few days later saying, "Oops, we ****ed up the call." Too bad they don't send a W in your stat column at the same time. They already have the challenge rule, and the replay booth on the field, and the refs can already stop play and review something in the last two minutes of the game. Just go whole-hog already, and have a senior official in the booth (with the power to override the on-field call) with access to the same replays we see at home. Get rid of that stupid on-field booth; it doesn't work. It's supposed to take a minute or less but always takes five, by the time the old bastard walks over to the booth, shoots the shit with the guy upstairs, watches it a few times... If they move the "final word" upstairs it'll happen a lot quicker and smoother.

And this isn't just for football. I think all sports should have more thorough refereeing by video evidence. There are slight inroads being made (whether a baseball is fair or foul, whether a hockey puck crosses the goal line, whether a basketball shot leaves the player's hands before the clock hits double zeroes) but it's not enough. How is an on-field ump supposed to catch the split-second difference between a runner's toe hitting the bag and the baseman catching the ball? Why do we have to watch an ump punch out a batter on a third strike when everyone at home can see on the replay that it was about six inches outside the strike zone? Sports are now multimillion-dollar businesses and, as such, should be reffed accordingly.